The initial intention of this speech was to set the context, from
an Irish republican and Sinn Fein perspective, of the current crisis in the Irish peace process.

I use the term peace process in its widest meaning and I will
return to this later.

As to the initial intention behind these remarks, that has been
overtaken by the current talks.

That makes this occasion no less important. On the contrary the
events of this past few days give my remarks greater import
because they are about a crisis in the peace process. And that
crisis continues despite the current talks.

Indeed it continues not least because of the way the British
government approaches these talks. That approach has been
characterised as making all other issues secondary to the issue
of IRA arms.

In other words, the issue of IRA weapons has been made a
pre-condition for progress on all other issues. This is in direct
breach of the Good Friday Agreement. The British government may
protest that this is not the case or in so far as it is the case,
that this arises from David Trimble's resignation and from the
price which Mr Trimble has put on the future stability of the
political institutions.

Resisting Change

For this reason the bulk of my remarks are on the arms issue, and
although I think it is a pity that this has to be so, it is also
indicative of where this process is. Why is this so? It is
because there is resistance to change in the north of Ireland,
not only within unionism but from within the British system also.

This goes back much further than the current crisis. Indeed, it
has been an historic factor in every effort to deliver equality,
justice, and peace. In this phase it goes back to the private
assurances in the side-letter that Tony Blair gave to David
Trimble hours after they had endorsed the Good Friday Agreement.

In the Good Friday Agreement all parties reaffirmed `their
commitment to the total disarmament of all paramilitary
organisations.' They also confirmed `their intention to continue
to work constructively and in good faith with the Independent
Commission, and to use any influence they may have, to achieve
the decommissioning of all paramilitary arms within two years
following endorsement in referendums, north and south, of the
agreement and in the context of the implementation of the overall
settlement'.

This is the agreement on decommissioning which the UUP and Sinn
Fein, and the other parties, including the British and Irish
governments, negotiated and agreed upon over three years ago.
This is an agreement which Sinn Fein is wedded to.

But the unionists sought further commitments from the British
government. Hence the letter from Mr. Blair - which is no more
than that - a letter from Mr. Blair which is outside the scope or
the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.

In similar vein, those officials within the British system who
have continued to seek the defeat of the IRA, in drafting the
enabling legislation which set up the Independent International
Commission on Decommissioning, ensured that this would have the
effect of strangling the work of that body even before it began.
In other words, the political imperative and the conflict
resolution ethos which underpinned the decommissioning section of
the Good Friday Agreement was diluted and made subject to the old
unionist and securocrat agenda.

Whether Tony Blair directed or was advised in this matter is
immaterial. He was responsible, even if it can be argued by him
that this was for good tactical reasons in order to keep the
unionists engaged. His government is responsible for permitting a
virus to remain at the heart of the agreement.

The fault line in the Agreement and of every crisis in it can be
traced to that point. That letter showed a willingness on the
part of the British government to pander to unionism and to
create the space for Mr. Trimble to commence his effort to hollow
out the Agreement. The target has been the range of political,
constitutional, institutional, justice, human rights and equality
issues contained in the Agreement. This is understandable from Mr
Trimble's perspective. His is a unionist perspective. He cannot
be blamed for coming at the Agreement from that perspective.

But of course the issue of decommissioning is not only a unionist
preoccupation. It was not introduced into the process by
unionists.

That responsibility rests with John Major's government whose
handling of the process can hardly be held up as a model of good
management and good faith. The issue was also introduced after
the IRA cessation of August 1994.

It is worth reminding ourselves that there would not have been an
IRA cessation if this matter had been made a pre-condition. In
other words none of the opportunities which have been opened up
in the last 7 years would have been possible.

Defenders of Mr. Major's role will point to the minority status
of his government to explain his approach. This government has no
such defence.

Progress has been made

For my part, I believe that the issue of arms can be resolved.
Indeed enormous progress has been made in the past 6 years,
particularly in relation to IRA arms. But, as I have said many
times, I do not believe that the issue of arms, all arms held by
all armed groups including those held by the state forces, will
be resolved within the 6 week artificial deadline imposed by
David Trimble's contrived and calculated resignation. Nor will it
be resolved on British government or unionist terms, or on the
basis of threat, veto or ultimatum. This is not within the gift
of the Sinn Fein leadership to deliver.

There is a collective responsibility on all parties to the
Agreement to resolve this issue and I have told the governments
and other parties this, not just at this time but ever since this
process began.

Some accuse Sinn Fein of being opposed to the decommissioning of
arms and of not doing enough to achieve this. This is untrue.

We in Sinn Fein have done our best and much progress has been
made on the issue of IRA arms while loyalist and British state
forces continue to use their weapons.

This year alone loyalists have carried out over 100 bomb attacks
on catholic homes, businesses and churches, shot dead two
Catholics in recent days and loyalists erected a blockade to
prevent Catholic primary school children from going to school in
North Belfast. Today there is more sad news. Last night Geraldine
Ewing, an elderly Catholic woman died after she and here family
were the victims of a sectarian eviction. Overnight there were
more bomb attacks on Catholic homes.

Also, at this sensitive time, the RUC in North Belfast have fired
at nationalists with a new and more deadly plastic bullet.

IRA initiatives

In stark contrast to the continued use of loyalist and British
weapons IRA guns are silent and the IRA cessations are now into
their 7th year. The IRA has acknowledged that the issue of arms
has to be dealt with as part of a conflict resolution process,
and last year the IRA leadership set out a context in which it
would put its weapons verifiably beyond use. In addition it took
the unprecedented initiative of agreeing with the two governments
the appointment of two International Inspectors and allowing them
to examine its arms dumps to verify that their weapons have not
been used. And finally, the IRA is engaged in ongoing discussions
with the IICD.

These are not small, unimportant events. No one who lived through
the 70s, or 80s, or most of the 90s, or who has even as a cursory
understanding of republican history and theology would ever have
considered any of these things possible. These are huge
developments, which, in the proper context, point the way to a
future free of IRA weapons.

The Sinn Fein leadership helped to create the conditions that
made this possible. We did so because of our commitment to a
lasting and just peace settlement on this island. The UUP
response to this progress has been to ignore Sinn Fein's
democratic mandate, the mandate of the other parties, the
referendum, the Good Friday Agreement itself and their
responsibilities and obligations. The British government have not
done much better.

Many republicans are angry at a Unionist leadership that
ridicules, belittles and undermines this progress, while at the
same time doing absolutely nothing to end the daily bomb and guns
attacks by loyalists on catholic families. They are angry at a
British government which underpins the UUP position, in breach of
the Agreement, and which has remilitarised nationalist and
republican heartlands. Unionists and the British government may
have a different view but republicans see it as I have described
here.

Back to the Agreement

If the issue of arms is to be dealt with effectively the
unionists and the British need to get real. They need to work
constructively and in good faith with us and all of the other
participants. They need to return to the Good Friday Agreement.
If they genuinely want to take guns out of Irish politics they
need to understand that the arms issue can only be resolved as
part of a genuine conflict resolution process. This means it has
to be dealt with as an objective of the peace process and not as
a precondition to the political process.

Moreover the democratic rights and entitlements of nationalists
and republicans cannot be conditional.

These rights are universal rights. They effect all citizens.

In the Good Friday Agreement these matters, that is policing,
demilitarisation, human rights, the justice system and the
equality agenda, are stand alone issues. These are issues to be
resolved in their own right. They cannot be withheld or granted
or subjected to a bartering process.

Sinn FÈin accepts our responsibilities on the arms issue. All the
other parties have exactly the same responsibility. Republicans
need to understand unionist concerns. But Unionists also need to
understand republican's concerns. Unionists need to consider what
they have done to instill confidence within physical force
republicanism that they are serious about building a just and
equitable dispensation. That the injustice, inequality and
discrimination which were inflicted on the nationalist community
are a thing of the past.

British government responsibility

The British government has to accept its responsibility for
militarising the political struggle. Not only has it a huge
military infrastructure but there is also a massive ongoing
intelligence gathering and surveillance strategy in place. Many
republican areas are still dominated by the paraphernalia of a
British war machine. The British government needs to consider
what it has done to instill confidence that it is serious about
advancing the GFA.

The British intelligence services have been heavily involved in
conspiracies to kill citizens.

Despite all of our efforts and the efforts of others to bring
these matters to the attention of those in power they appear to
be oblivious even yet to how offensive nationalist and
republicans feel to the presence of British troops in our
country.

In recent years Sinn Fein has stretched ourselves and our
constituency to the limit. We have gone much further than any
other party to the Good Friday Agreement in our efforts to
resolve the issue of arms. We have tried to help David Trimble.
But what has David Trimble done to help in this endeavour? He
continues to veto the work of the Minister of Education and the
Minister of Health so that they cannot fulfill all of their
responsibilities as Ministers.

He has prevented the all Ireland institutions, and ironically the
British-Irish Council from functioning as they should. He has
breached his own pledge of office and he has fractured the
political architecture of the Agreement. He has persisted in
these actions despite a court judgement that he is behaving
unlawfully. But more importantly than this he has signalled to
republicans and nationalists that he is not committed to the Good
Friday Agreement except on his terms. He has also deepened the
crisis within unionism by his failure to endorse all aspects of
the Good Friday Agreement and by failing to give positive
leadership on a consistent basis.

Mr Trimble has protested that it is not his responsibility to
influence republicans on the arms issue and he has dismissed the
suggestion that he and Mr Blair have a pivotal role to play.

This is a huge mistake. Republicans and nationalists want to be
convinced that unionism is facing up to its responsibilities.
They want to believe that a British government is about righting
wrongs and ushering in a new dispensation based upon equality.

Even if we accept Mr Trimble's argument that he has no role to
play in relation to republican weapons are people not entitled to
ask what has unionism done to secure the silence of loyalist
weapons?

Loyalist and British weapons

What initiatives or influence or discussions or efforts has been
undertaken to stop the nightly bomb attacks against Catholics, or
the gun attacks that have killed Catholics? Political
discrimination and sanctions against Sinn Fein are one end of a
spectrum which at the other end sees Catholics killed and
Catholic homes singled out in attacks which are largely
unreported here in Britain.

At a time when the concentration by unionists and the British
government is on silent IRA weapons who has responsibility to
deal with the issue of loyalist arms in deadly use on a daily
basis? Who has a responsibility to deal with British arms? Are
they also not part of the Good Friday Agreement? Or do they
represent the acceptable face of terrorism, the acceptable guns
in our society?

If this phase of the process is to succeed then the two
governments and all the parties need to return to the Good Friday
Agreement. It contains the template for dealing with these issues
and many other matters that need to be resolved as part of this
conflict resolution process. Sinn FÈin has developed a viable
approach to resolving the weapons issue. It is an approach based
on the Good Friday Agreement.

The Good Friday Agreement is about creating a new political
dispensation based on equality and parity of esteem. This cannot
be achieved by turning an objective of a peace process, the
removal of weapons, into a precondition of the political process.
The British government cannot square this approach with their
stated objective to implement the Good Friday Agreement.

Ending Conflict - Permanently

I appreciate the difficulties which some unionists have about the
current process. I appreciate the problem they have with the
continued existence of the IRA itself, even though it is no
threat to the process, and even though its guns are silent. But
there is no easy way to sort out these issues and for my part I
want to reiterate my total commitment to playing a leadership
role in bringing a permanent end to political conflict on our
island, including physical force republicanism. I say this
conscious of the dangers, risks, and history of such departures.

I have no illusions about any of this and I know my commitment is
shared by the Sinn Fein leadership. From within the broad
republican constituency we are working for the day when all the
armed groups, including the IRA cease to be.

Sinn Fein is about building political support for the republican
position and we make no apologies for so doing. This is an
entirely legitimate democratic and peaceful enterprise and it
should be underpinned not undermined or subverted. We are totally
committed to building the peace process but the IRA are not sheep
and they will not be herded or cajoled or pressurised. Nor should
they be.

The length of the IRA cessation and its various initiatives to
sustain the current process show that it too is genuinely
interested in building the peace process. So also does its
discipline in the face of British and loyalist provocation. All
of this provides hope for the future. This should be built upon
not destroyed.

British government obligations

So what of the British government's obligations? Under the terms
of the Good Friday Agreement the British government is committed
to delivering on a range of key issues. These include:

A new beginning to Policing, through the creation of an
accountable and representative policing service which is fully
accountable for its actions and free from partisan political
control.

A fair and impartial system of justice

Effective
structures to safeguard human rights

Equality in all aspects
of society - economic, social, cultural and political.

The
demilitarisation of our society.

They have not delivered on these
issues. They have not created the level playing field the Good
Friday Agreement was designed to provide. Instead there has been
delay and dilution.

On policing the British government engaged in chicanery and
duplicity. It emasculated its own Patten report and even up to
this point it is resisting the challenge to create a genuinely
new beginning to policing to which all of us can assent. Someone
needs to spell out why this is so. Why is anyone afraid of a
policing service which would have the support of unionists and
republicans and nationalists and loyalists.

There is no fair system of justice. The old discredited conveyor
belt system based on repressive laws and no jury courts remains
in place.

The Human Rights Commission lacks legislative authority and
powers, is underfunded and under resourced and lacks
representativeness.

The equality agenda is subjected to continuous dilution instead
of being driven forward sensitively but in a determined way.

And the British Army generals and the securocrats tell the
government that they are opposed to demilitarisation and proud
republican heartlands, overwhelmingly in support of the GFA
continue to suffer British military occupation.

So it is time for real leadership and decisive action from the
British government.

Sinn Fein - We will do our best

I do not understate or underestimate Sinn Fein's obligations or
responsibilities. For our part we will do everything we can to
make this process survive and prosper. We will do our best. Mr.
Blair and Mr. Trimble must do likewise.

This process has brought unionism once again to the crossroads.
Are their leaders capable of working with their nationalist and
republican neighbours on the basis of equality? Are they capable
of carving out partnership politics to underpin a process towards
peace and justice for all sections of the people of our island?

I am convinced that the overwhelming majority of unionists want
the Good Friday Agreement to work but they are not being given
consistent leadership at this time.

This crisis also has brought the British government and Mr. Blair
to a defining moment.

Sinn Fein has a vision for the future. This goes beyond this
current, troubled and protracted phase of Anglo-Irish
relationships. It goes beyond present difficulties. It is
far-sighted and strategic. Our democratic view is based upon the
confident knowledge that the people of the island of Ireland,
including the unionists, are entitled to govern ourselves and can
do so better than anyone else.

Our vision is inclusive. We are totally committed to establishing
an entirely new, democratic and harmonious future with our
unionist neighbours. I know we have still a lot to learn about
the unionists viewpoint, about their concerns, fears and
aspirations. One of the failures thus far of this process is that
a process of intelligent and pro active listening by all sides is
not as advanced as it needs to be if we are to appreciate each
others needs and difficulties. This has to be corrected and the
good work which has been done in this regard, including at Weston
Park, needs to be built upon.

When this British government came to power it inherited an
opportunity to shape a peaceful future relationship between our
two islands. It is fair to say that Mr. Blair responded
positively to the challenge. Some republicans say that he could
have done little else. I say different. And I commend Mr. Blair
for doing so.

He now has to decide on his vision for the future. Is it to be
one of continuous crisis management? Is the nature of the
relationship between our two islands to be a repeat of the sad
and troubled history of the past? Are the politics of exclusion,
sectarianism, and bigotry which underpin rejectionist unionism to
become the mark of Mr Blair's governance of a part of my country?
Or will this newly elected government use its huge and
unprecedented mandate to usher in change based upon equality and
justice for all the people of the north of Ireland?

Implementing British policy

I do not expect Mr Blair, tonight, to declare his support for
Irish unity and independence. It would be better if he did and I
have said this to him many times. I will continue to say this to
him, but this evening I am calling on him to fulfil his
obligations under the Good Friday Agreement. In other words I ask
him to implement the policy of his government.

This means facing up to rejectionists and sceptics and cynics
within his own system, as well as within rejectionist unionism.

It means facing up to the reality that the only threat to the
process comes from loyalist guns.

It means having a sense of how far we have all come.

It means understanding and valuing the progress which has been
made.

It means building on this. It means learning from the mistakes of
the past and being wedded to a vision for the future.

It means keeping an eye on the prize.

In conclusion I would like to reiterate Sinn Fein's commitment to
the peace process and to the Good Friday Agreement. Despite the
current difficulties it remains my conviction that this process
will succeed. It will fail only if people like us give up. We
have no intention of doing so. No one said that this process was
going to be easy. That is something I am sure everyone can agree
about.